What's an absolutely medium quality game? Not great, incredible or terrible or any single ended extreme. Dead medium quality
-
Following up on this comment since I haven't seen a thread about it: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/comment/14639216
Unreal 2, at launch, was the most absolutely 7/10 game I've ever played. Just a very generic singleplayer FPS, and not the sequel to Unreal that everyone was hoping for.
I say "at launch," though, because almost a year after the game's release, they added multiplayer, and that is still my favorite multiplayer game.
-
Following up on this comment since I haven't seen a thread about it: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/comment/14639216
we are in a golden age of medium good action games. lies of p, stellar blade, khazan the first berserker, another crab's treasure come to mind for me.
non-fromsoft soulslikes are starting to find their voice. they're not quite great yet, but they're competent now.
-
Following up on this comment since I haven't seen a thread about it: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/comment/14639216
Assault Spy comes to mind.
And Mad Max maybe?
-
Following up on this comment since I haven't seen a thread about it: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/comment/14639216
Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning
Had all the individual makings of an exceptional game (with input from Todd Macfarlane, R A Salvatore and Grant Kirkhope), and while it was definitely enjoyable enough - it lacked any wow-factor whatsoever, winding up an otherwise forgettable 7/10.
-
Following up on this comment since I haven't seen a thread about it: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/comment/14639216
From a gameplay perspective GTA has been mid for ages.
-
we are in a golden age of medium good action games. lies of p, stellar blade, khazan the first berserker, another crab's treasure come to mind for me.
non-fromsoft soulslikes are starting to find their voice. they're not quite great yet, but they're competent now.
Lies of P is amazing how dare you.
-
Following up on this comment since I haven't seen a thread about it: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/comment/14639216
In my opinion ( haven't played or really seen the DLCs, so I'm just talking about base game ), Pokemon Scarlet and Violet.
Definitely had ups and downs when I did my only playthrough. Absolutely middle of the road compared to the official games ( completed gen 3, part way through gens 4-7 ) I have played and still even middle of the road compared to some of the fan games I've played over the years.
-
Well, when it comes to video games, despite being foundational, Mario Bros. At the time, it was mids, but there were a lot less truly great games, and less abysmal ones so it looked better than it was. The series got better, but that first one was kinda meh. It's all timing jumps, which is fine as far it as it goes, but there were both better and worse options on that console.
Away from video game, Life is about as meh as it gets. No real strategy, no depth. But it's a good time killer and you can play it with a table full of people drinking and not get bogged down or into arguments because of the game (unlike monopoly lol).
Do you mean Mario Bros:
Or Super Mario Bros? They are very different games.
-
Well, when it comes to video games, despite being foundational, Mario Bros. At the time, it was mids, but there were a lot less truly great games, and less abysmal ones so it looked better than it was. The series got better, but that first one was kinda meh. It's all timing jumps, which is fine as far it as it goes, but there were both better and worse options on that console.
Away from video game, Life is about as meh as it gets. No real strategy, no depth. But it's a good time killer and you can play it with a table full of people drinking and not get bogged down or into arguments because of the game (unlike monopoly lol).
wrote on last edited by [email protected]If you are actually talking about Mario Bros., i.e. the game that's only about kicking turtles, crabs and flies coming out of pipes, yeah, I'd say that one was hardly a new thing.
Super Mario Bros. though? Hard disagree. Back then, that's a scrolling platformer with controllable jumps, inertia that let you do sliding tricks, and relatively complex physics (acceleration, positional damage, shells, ...)
Also very good readability with mechanics that were easy to learn on the spot.
Look at what most platformers played like around that time, and even what basic design errors a lot of them kept doing long after that. SMB was lightning in a bottle.
-
Assault Spy comes to mind.
And Mad Max maybe?
Hell no, Mad Max was way more fun than it had any right to be. I'll agree that on paper it didn't look like anything special, with mechanics we'd seen lots of times in other games, but in practice everything came together as much more than the sum of it's parts.
-
Following up on this comment since I haven't seen a thread about it: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/comment/14639216
Neverwinter Nights
The multiplayer is supposedly incredible. But I remember being extremely whelmed by the main game.
But it's hard to remember the mid games. Because it is very likely that they didn't leave any lasting impression.
And especially if previous titles in a series or from a studio were great a mid game would feel disappointingly bad. Although compared to other games they might actually still be considered great.
-
Following up on this comment since I haven't seen a thread about it: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/comment/14639216
This is a tough question because it's like asking "What's the most forgettable game you've ever played?" I can remember some of the best and worst games I've ever played, but mediocre games are explicitly not interesting.
That said, the first one that came to mind for me was Starshot: Space Circus Fever for N64. It's just a very generic late-'90s collectathon platformer. It's hard to be mad at it, because it's not terrible or anything, there's just no reason to play it. If you've got an N64, there's Mario, Banjo, Rayman, even B- and C-tier stuff like Gex and Chameleon Twist. There's hidden gems like Space Station Silicon Valley or Rocket: Robot on Wheels.
That last one is the only reason I played Starshot, I saw it clearanced at a used game store and was like "Oh yeah, I remember hearing this game was good," but it turned out I was thinking of Rocket. That game actually is good, while Starshot is just fine.
-
Following up on this comment since I haven't seen a thread about it: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/comment/14639216
Sackboy a Big Adventure. Absolutely no ill will towards it, and the issue may lie more with me than the game, but it just felt very "okay" for me.
-
Following up on this comment since I haven't seen a thread about it: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/comment/14639216
The Halo series.
I like shooters, so I got the full bundle and I tried hard to like it.
None of the games gave me a lasting impression. The plot didn't stick with me, the enemies were weird, the guns felt weak and flimsy, the rooms kept repeating in some sections and it got very boring. There were some fun bits with the vehicles, etc., but overall the experience was... pretty much average.
I was expecting something like the Half-Life series, but this wasn't it.
-
Following up on this comment since I haven't seen a thread about it: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/comment/14639216
-
Hell no, Mad Max was way more fun than it had any right to be. I'll agree that on paper it didn't look like anything special, with mechanics we'd seen lots of times in other games, but in practice everything came together as much more than the sum of it's parts.
Hmm… sure, but ima die on the hill Mad Max should be a linear game with sole focus on vehicular/melee combat. I don't really think it needs to be an open world game.
-
Following up on this comment since I haven't seen a thread about it: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/comment/14639216
I said any Call of Duty from the past decade as answer to the original comment, and I still think that is a solid candidate. However, another game I played recently that qualifies I think is Sleeping Dogs. Perfectly cromulent 7/10 GTA clone but ultimately not pulling up any trees.
-
Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning
Had all the individual makings of an exceptional game (with input from Todd Macfarlane, R A Salvatore and Grant Kirkhope), and while it was definitely enjoyable enough - it lacked any wow-factor whatsoever, winding up an otherwise forgettable 7/10.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]At the time of its release, it's wow factor for me was simply some fucking color, compared to PS3 Skyrim which had released mere months earlier.
I love both games, but there's something about Amalur that I think I love more that I can only think of as it being just medium, average, mediocre but not bad. It's just something kinda fun. Comfortable.
-
Following up on this comment since I haven't seen a thread about it: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/comment/14639216
wrote on last edited by [email protected]A hell of a lot of Ubisoft open-world slop released around and in the 2010s.
-
From recent memory: Starfield.
I didn't think it was terrible in and of itself, but it also wasn't very good. It was just missing that certain something Bethesda RPGs had before it. Just a meh experience the whole way through.
I think it was the way that exploration felt like a grind that made it so “meh”. A whole universe to explore, and you’re either going to come to a barren rock planet, or find the same enemy base/outpost 5 times in a row.
For a game where space exploration was one of the main selling points, it felt remarkably unlike exploring at times.
